Authentic CSA sword?

[delcov]

My brother found this 30" CSA sword at a flea market this past year when this flea market started recovering from the pandemic. The seller didn't mention where he got it. I've been trying to track down any information about it, but It's been proving difficult, so I'm coming to you guys for any help. It appears to be a CSA NCO sword, but I can find no maker's mark. It is heavy, rusted and appears to be a steel blade with potentially brass hilt. I don't believe the construction to be modern, though it could be reproduction from the 70's or 80's. But there are aspects to it that make me feel that it is real or a very uninformed forgery.
1. Irregularities - the hilt is a D-Shape, but most swords with D-shaped hilts that I've seen have a "knob" that extends off the hilt in the opposite direction of the curve. This one appears to be broken off and the edges smoothed over time.
2. A pit in the blade that has rust in it.
3. The CSA embossed lettering is irregular and doesn't match what you find on replicas.
4. The blade is only 30" long (34" with hilt) and most replicas are 37" or 34" blade.
5. The guard is smaller on the side where your thumb would rest and longer on the side where the fingers would need protection. I have seen only one other sword image during the civil war with this design and it was a Union sword.

I welcome any and all opinions. I'm no expert in Civil war arms, but I have recently developed a passion for Civil War Confederate history, especially as it relates to KGC, SoL and OAK interactions in Indiana.
Photos:

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[Blackfoot58]

My brother found this 30" CSA sword at a flea market this past year when this flea market started recovering from the pandemic. The seller didn't mention where he got it. I've been trying to track down any information about it, but It's been proving difficult, so I'm coming to you guys for any help. It appears to be a CSA NCO sword, but I can find no maker's mark. It is heavy, rusted and appears to be a steel blade with potentially brass hilt. I don't believe the construction to be modern, though it could be reproduction from the 70's or 80's. But there are aspects to it that make me feel that it is real or a very uninformed forgery.
1. Irregularities - the hilt is a D-Shape, but most swords with D-shaped hilts that I've seen have a "knob" that extends off the hilt in the opposite direction of the curve. This one appears to be broken off and the edges smoothed over time.
2. A pit in the blade that has rust in it.
3. The CSA embossed lettering is irregular and doesn't match what you find on replicas.
4. The blade is only 30" long (34" with hilt) and most replicas are 37" or 34" blade.
5. The guard is smaller on the side where your thumb would rest and longer on the side where the fingers would need protection. I have seen only one other sword image during the civil war with this design and it was a Union sword.

I welcome any and all opinions. I'm no expert in Civil war arms, but I have recently developed a passion for Civil War Confederate history, especially as it relates to KGC, SoL and OAK interactions in Indiana.
Photos:
View attachment 2072677View attachment 2072673View attachment 2072672View attachment 2072671View attachment 2072663View attachment 2072662View attachment 2072664View attachment 2072666View attachment 2072667View attachment 2072668View attachment 2072669View attachment 2072670View attachment 2072665

Is it an actual wire-wrapped grip, or cast to appear as such? I can’t tell. Very ornate blade, which some NCO’s had, especially if presented from their wealthier family. How many places are the CSA initials located?

 

[delcov]

Is it an actual wire-wrapped grip, or cast to appear as such? I can’t tell. Very ornate blade, which some NCO’s had, especially if presented from their wealthier family. How many places are the CSA initials located?

The grip wiring seems real. I can put my fingernail in the grooves and they can move a very tiny amount. The CSA acronym is in 3 places.. at the base of each side of the blade and on the outside of the bigger hilt guard.

 

[cmthunder]

Love the sword

 

[sprailroad]

Wish that sword could tell you it's story. Nice

 

[BennyV]

Looks legit, but who knows

 

[The Rebel]

Beautiful Sword! I'd be willing to bet its original but need more experts to chime it. It's possible it is an imported sword.

 

[antmike915]

Nice looking sword.

 

[mcb66]

The one obvious red flag that I see is the scabbard. Almost every legit CW era sword that I have ever seen had wear from being used and carried on a horse. This scabbard looks old but has no discernable damage from field use. Everything about this sword looks nice but is off just a bit. Almost too much patina but no evidence of hard use. These swords were used, not just carried. I would be concerned.

 

[devldog]

Nice looking sword. I am by no means an authority on CW swords, but most Artillery Swords had a straight blade such as this one. I wonder if this could be an Artillery Sword? It looks good. Best of luck to you with the ID.

 

[creskol]

I may be wrong, but based on the grip, the CSA quality on the guard, and the way the handle is attached, I am going to place my bet on it being a reproduction from India, roughly fashioned after an 1840 Pattern Ames NCO's Sword. Places like River Junction sell them.

 

[delcov]

I may be wrong, but based on the grip, the CSA quality on the guard, and the way the handle is attached, I am going to place my bet on it being a reproduction from India, roughly fashioned after an 1840 Pattern Ames NCO's Sword. Places like River Junction sell them.

I really appreciate the feedback everyone. I've seen a replica on the River Junction website and this doesn't seem to have those same qualities.

1. This has a real wire grip, not the single-piece molded grip. Also, the grip in the replica is shiny and more of a yellow color than what I have.
2. This has notches in the blade, presumably from use.
3. The blade engraving is worn down close to the hilt from constant action of being pulled from the sheath. This is unlikely to happen from a collector's replica.
4. The blade is shedding oxidation "powder" when I handle it. If it were a relatively modern replica, would this happen?
5. The "CSA" hilt guard molding is different not the same. The ones from places like River Junction I presume to use machine-forged parts in their replicas since the hilt is molded. I'd imagine that hand-forged hilt guards would not be identical, and this one is certainly not identical to the replica I looked at.

I could be wrong though.

 

[creskol]

I really appreciate the feedback everyone. I've seen a replica on the River Junction website and this doesn't seem to have those same qualities.

1. This has a real wire grip, not the single-piece molded grip. Also, the grip in the replica is shiny and more of a yellow color than what I have.
2. This has notches in the blade, presumably from use.
3. The blade engraving is worn down close to the hilt from constant action of being pulled from the sheath. This is unlikely to happen from a collector's replica.
4. The blade is shedding oxidation "powder" when I handle it. If it were a relatively modern replica, would this happen?
5. The "CSA" hilt guard molding is different not the same. The ones from places like River Junction I presume to use machine-forged parts in their replicas since the hilt is molded. I'd imagine that hand-forged hilt guards would not be identical, and this one is certainly not identical to the replica I looked at.

I could be wrong though.

One other highly suspect thing that raises the red flag is evidence of semi-vertical "grinding marks on the section of blade shown below. Perhaps the maker was ground off in order to conceal something.

 

[delcov]

One other highly suspect thing that raises the red flag is evidence of semi-vertical "grinding marks on the section of blade shown below. Perhaps the maker was ground off in order to conceal something.View attachment 2076604

I assumed that was wear and tear from being unsheathed a lot. If it's grinding, could there be a valid reason? I've heard stories of the Confederate army repurposing confiscated Union weapons. Could the makers mark have been grinded off before being reissued to a Confederate NCO?

 

[creskol]

I assumed that was wear and tear from being unsheathed a lot. If it's grinding, could there be a valid reason? I've heard stories of the Confederate army repurposing confiscated Union weapons. Could the makers mark have been grinded off before being reissued to a Confederate NCO?

Unfortunately, those marks aren't from wear and tear. Grinding like that is a well known technique used by "fakers" to remove stamps in order to deceive. I fell certain that the sword you show has been intentionally defaced.

 

[jgoetz4]

Looks to be fake, like this one. relicman.com/fakes/zfakeWeaponSwordCSA.htm
Jim

 

[delcov]

Looks to be fake, like this one. relicman.com/fakes/zfakeWeaponSwordCSA.htm
Jim

Thank you! I wish that the blog listed how they evaluate the sword to know whether it is fake... but you guys did as much here. I appreciate all of the evaluations and after considering all the evidence each of you have presented, I guess that it is fake. Disappointing, but so be it. I'll let my brother know.